ADJUDICATION OFFICER DECISION/RECOMMENDATION
Adjudication Reference: ADJ-00004188
Parties:
| Complainant | Respondent |
Anonymised Parties | An Employee | A Company |
Representatives | Self. | Judy McNamara IBEC |
Complaint(s):
Act | Complaint/Dispute Reference No. | Date of Receipt |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994 | CA-00006072-005 | 18/07/2016 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under section 77 of the Employment Equality Act, 1998 | CA-00006072-006 | 18/07/2016 |
Complaint seeking adjudication by the Workplace Relations Commission under Section 25 of the Protection of Employees (Temporary Agency Work) Act, 2012 | CA-00006072-007 | 18/07/2016 |
Date of Adjudication Hearing: 15/11/2017
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Niamh O'Carroll Kelly
Procedure:
In accordance with Section 41(4) of the Workplace Relations Act, 2015 and following the presentation by an employee of a complaint of a contravention by an employer of an Act contained in Schedule 5 of the Workplace Relations Act of 2015 or such other act as may be referred to in the 2015 Act, made to the Director General and following a referral by the said Director General of this matter to the Adjudication services, I can confirm that I have fulfilled my obligation to make all relevant inquiries into the complaint or dispute. I have additionally and where appropriate heard the oral evidence of the parties and their witnesses and have taken account of the evidence tendered in the course of the hearing.
The Complainant herein has referred a matter for dispute resolution under
Section 77 Employment Equality Act, 1998, Section 25 of the Protection of Employees (Temporary Agency Work) Act 2012 and Section 7 of the Terms of Employment (Information) Act, 1994. The referral has not been made within six months of the initial circumstances of the relevant dispute/contravention.
Summary of Complainant’s Case:
The complainant stated that he was employed at the respondent premises since 2006. He was placed there by an Agency. He continues to work there today however in January, 2017 he was employed by the respondent. He did get a contract of employment however he refused to sign it because he was unhappy with some of the terms relative to other employee’s term and conditions. He did not get a contract of employment in 2006 and that is the reason for lodging this complaint. In 2006 he became aware that there was an employee of the respondent who was on a better rate of pay than he was. He states that he was discriminate against on grounds of gender. He states that in 2011 and 2012 he was on a wage that was less that minimum wage. He was earning € 7.65 up to €8.65 per hour. |
Summary of Respondent’s Case:
The complainant was not an employee of the respondent at the material time. The complainant was first employed by the respondent on the 1st January, 2017. Prior to that he worked at the respondent premises but was an employee of an Agency. In relation to the only claim that is relevant to the respondent, Section 7 Term of Employment Information Act , 1994, the complainant was given a copy of his contract of employment in both English and Polish however he refused to signed for it. |
Findings and Conclusions:
CA 6072- 002 The alleged discrimination in relation to pay occurred in 2006. The complainant filed his claim on the 18.07.2016. The claim is statute barred. CA 6072- 003 This matter arises from an alleged breach of minimum wages provisions, the alleged breach occurred in 2011 and 2012. The complainant filed his claim on the 18.07.2016. The claim is statute barred. CA 6072 – 001 The complainant was given a contract of employment when he commenced his employment with the respondent in January, 2017. He refused to sign it. The complainant was not given a contract of employment in 2006, when he commenced working for the Agency. His claim relates to the Agencies breach of the Act in 2006. The complainant lodged his claim on the 18.07.2016. The claim is statute barred. Furthermore, I find that the respondent is a stranger to the claims CA 6072-002 and CA 6072-003 based on the fact that the complainant was not an employee of theirs at the relevant time.
|
Decision:
Section 41 of the Workplace Relations Act 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaints in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under Schedule 6 of that Act.
Section 79 of the Employment Equality Acts, 1998 – 2015 requires that I make a decision in relation to the complaint in accordance with the relevant redress provisions under section 82 of the Act.
CA 6072 – 001. This claim is statute barred.
CA 6072- 002. This claim is statute barred.
CA 6072- 003. This claim is statute barred.
|
Dated: 4th April 2018
Workplace Relations Commission Adjudication Officer: Niamh O'Carroll Kelly
Key Words:
|